deappleby.com

Stoneybrook's Home Page

Amenities

Announcements

Annual Report & Disclosures

Architectural Standards

Assessments

Building Permits

CAI

Calendar

CERT Training

Committees

Contacts

Events

FAQ for Occupancy Ledgers

Fence Project

Financials

Forms

Governing Documents

Insurance

Meetings

Minutes

Minutes Review

Newsletter

Parking Assignment

Photos

Plans Maps

Recent Sales

Rumors

SVOA Blog

Don's Home Page

 

Stoneybrook Villas Owners Assoc Unofficial Blog
A place for residents to express their views.
Building 412 boulevard fencing
photo

Consideration is being given by the Board to removing this existing fence in front of building 412 and having the area, right up to the balcony decks open to vagrants, people walking their dogs and trash blowing onto the newly opened area.




At a meeting with the residents of the first floor on the Bellflower Boulevard side, they were only able to consider two options for alternate security: 1) having the holes beneath the balconies plugged with pickets, or a new fence similar to what was placed in front of the Clubhouse and building 552 installed half-way between the sidewalk and the buildings. They were not even allowed to consider a new fence along the sidewalk as it is now on Bellflower Blvd. in front of building 412.




At a time when finances are under so much pressure and constrained, it seems inappropriate to consider at this time the removal of this fence that has provided relative security for the residents of building 412 along Bellflower Blvd. Yes, some attention could be given to its maintenance and temporary measures poorly used to piece it together where the new fence was installed at the vehicle entrances.




2008-04-14 12:24:38 GMT
Comments (1 total)
Author:Anonymous
That meeting was held on April 9, 2008. THEY WERE ONLY SUPPOSED TO CONSIDER TWO OPTIONS. The second option, a fence in between the sidewalk and halfway up to the building would only be permitted to be four feet high due to zoning requirements. Owners from five of these ground floor units were present at the meeting. Two Board members, Speedy Watson and Tony Romano were both present at the meeting.
There are six units on the bottom floor of building 412 that would be directly affected by this new phase II fence because it would be built directly below their balconies and would allow people from the street the freedom to walk right up to the resident's balconies. ALL FIVE OF THE OWNERS PRESENT WERE STRONGLY OPPOSED TO PLACING THE NEW FENCE DIRECTLY UNDER THEIR BALCONIES.
It was mentioned that although the owners were instructed to only discuss the two options on the agenda, that a THIRD OPTION is when the existing black fence along the sidwalk needs to be replaced, then replace it along the sidewalk with a new six foot high fence, which can be done since the old fence was six feet high.
Karen Barenstein requested that the five owners vote on which of the THREE OPTIONS they wanted and all five voted for OPTION THREE TO REPLACE THE FENCE ALONG THE SIDEWALK.
2008-04-19 14:40:41 GMT
Compose a comment for this post.
Comment:
0 characters left (limit 4,000 characters). No HTML permitted.
Word verification:
To validate this comment, showing us that you are human, and not a computer, please retype the following code in the field provided.
(This helps prevent blog spam.)
Add to My Yahoo! RSS